We live in an "age of apologies," a relatively universal and recent phenomenon. Political apologies are primarily offered by liberal democracies or countries undergoing transformation toward such systems. These national apologies address victims’ need for recognition and truth-telling. However, victims of human rights violations are often disappointed by the limited long-term impact of these apologies. This is the finding of Marieke Zoodsma, who will defend her dissertation on December 11.
From the Dutch Prime Minister’s apology for the Netherlands’ role in the slave trade to the Colombian President’s apology for paramilitary massacres in the 1990s and Japan’s expressions of regret to China for past aggression, apologies now seem to be everywhere. The role these gestures can play in reconciliation and transformation processes after gross human rights violations remains contentious. Are apologies universally valuable gestures that address important needs of victims? Or are they "empty gestures" primarily aimed at political gain, failing to result in structural changes?
329 Political apologies
Zoodsma explored the so-called "age of apologies" by examining where, how, and when political apologies for human rights violations have been made globally. This research led to the creation of the Political Apology database, which includes 329 political apologies offered by 74 countries, mainly since the end of the Cold War. These findings support the idea that the number of political apologies has indeed increased and that this is a relatively universal and recent phenomenon.
The results also show that political apologies are predominantly offered by liberal democracies or countries transitioning toward such systems, and that countries are selective about the human rights violations for which they apologize. Nations often focus on specific atrocities (a massacre) rather than the broader contexts in which these human rights violations occurred (for instance colonialism).
Global perception of political apologies
Zoodsma also studied how political apologies are evaluated worldwide. Findings from large-scale cross-national research and case studies in El Salvador, South Korea, and the United Kingdom reveal that explicit acknowledgment of wrongdoing is crucial to how people assess apologies for human rights violations and how valuable they find them. This holds true for both victim and non-victim groups in diverse countries worldwide. The research suggests that apologies meet a shared global need for recognition and truth-telling.
However, victims of human rights violations often feel let down by the limited long-term impact of these apologies. They had hoped that the apology would mark the beginning of a process of transformation and reconciliation, but a lack of reparative measures often leads to little actual change.
Opening conversations about the past
Despite their limitations, apologies can open the door to discussions about the past and pave the way for a new orientation toward the future, where victims of severe and systematic human rights violations find a new place. This is especially meaningful when human rights violations have been ignored or denied for a long time, making this the most significant value of political apologies.
